The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1887-01-07

4
nepln canal, so was he in favor OF the
enlargement Of the Erie canal, or Of
any other measure which would give
the Western producer cheap water
transportation to the Eastern markets
IL was this question OF cheap water
transportation which had led to the
drafting OF the interstate commerce
bill, now under consideration, whose
purpose was 20 give the producer OF the
West and the consumer of the East q
little relief from the burdens imposed
upon them by railroad rapscity.
Mr.. Nelson (Minn.) contended that
% method Of solving the cheap trans.
portation que ton could be more eff.
cacious than thatsof enlarSipg and i'm
proving the canals.
M. Plumb (IlI) advocated the
passsge Of the bill, regarGiog it as the
most important one which had been
brought to the attention Of the present
Congress.
The morning hour having expired,
the committee rose aud the bill re-
sumed is place upon the calendar.
The HoUse then went into Commit
tee of the Whole, Mr.. Springer (Ill.)
in the chair, on the pension appro-
priation bill, which appropriates 49,.
247 800, being only 5000 below the
estimates, the reduction being in the
item for the rent OF offices for pension
agencies. Without an amendment or
discussion, the bill was read, reported
to the House and passed.
The House then (yeas 1873, nays, ~
went into Committee OF the Whole,
Mr.. Springer I'll in the chair, on the
naval reorganization bill.
Mr.. Sayres TEX advocated the
measure. He proceeded 10 draw a
deplorable picture OF a navy too weak
to fight and TOO slow to run away, and
Of navy yards useless and worn out,
aud utterly incapable of construc ing
first class war vessels; and, In tracing
the cauee4 OF this worthlessness and
decay to the cumbersome organ cation
of tue navy, he fortified his position
with extracts from the exercised
opinions Of Secretaries Whitney ard
Chandler. He Stat ID that the oopoei-
ton TO the measure was directed to
that feature which provided for the
consolidation of the Bureaus of EQUIP
ment and Recruiting, of Steam En.
Riueering and OF Construction and Re-
pair. But for the consideration o these
three bureaus, there would be no OBJ
stacle to the passage of the bill.
Mr. Boutelle (Me J opposed the bill
The existing organization of the navy
was adequate to all requirements of the
present and the probable requiem snts
OF the future. Underthe organization,
"a 1t stood today, the United States
Navy Department, confronted In 1851
by more gigantic foe than 1t was
likaly to meet in the immediate future,
had baen enabled in the twinkling OF
an eye to call into existence naval
great and effective in DOW
er and resources. This organization
had been found TO be efficient until
the return to power of that party
which had opposed the navy during
the late disturbance. 1t might be a
cause for national regret that in the
organ sa'ion OF the Navy Department
in 1861 that department had not had
the assistance Of the present chairman
Of the Committee on Naval Affairs or
OF his associates on the other side OF
the chamber; but Mt that time those
gentlemen had been engaged in efforts
to consolidate the United States Navy
and reduce the expenses of the depart
ment by getting rid Of its surplus Off
GERS and men. But the navy had
done the best ii could without them,
and he thought that it had got
along pretty we'll. Now, however, the
was made to uproot the
under which everything
creditable to the navy had thus fer
been achieved. After the election of a
Democratic President, or, perhaps, he
ought TO qualify that by saying after
the induction of a Democratic Presi-
dent into ofli 70 under due form OF law,
and the appointment OF Democratic |
Secretary of the Navy, a proposition
wss brought in, with the tscit indorse.
ment OF tbs Navy Department, for @
of that department. |
But this proposition was essentially |
iifl rent from the pending measure, |
which bad not received the indorse. |
ment of the department. Descending
% discussion OF its details, he 81. |
verely criticised the feature which, he |
declared, would break down the |
autonomy OF the great engineering
bureau 1t the very hour when the |
country was looking 10 it to place the
American navy in advance Of the best |
achievements of the world.
Mr.. McAdoo IN. j. favored the bill.
The gentleman from Maine, Mr.. Bou-
ellie, had extollsd the great achieve
nentl of the navy during the war.
he (Mr. MeAdoo) recogniz ID the
grandeur OF those achievements, but
,alled attention to the great expense
which they had entailed upon the
people OF the country. Had consoli-
iation OF the bureaus been made in
$50 the same achievements would
ave been performed by the navy
vito greater efficiency and with far
ess expense to the people.
Pending further debate the commit
&c rose. Mr.. Henderson (Ia) intro
luced bill authorizing the construc-
ion OF bridge across the Mississippi
liver at Dubuque, la. Referred. The
louise then adjourned.
"MOrphiomanin."